DOCSLIB.ORG

Innovation, Element of Power

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Innovation, Element of Power Innovation, Element of Power Laurent Murawiec published by Geopol, C.A.S.E. translation: Elizabeth Heeter This is a translation of Laurent Murawiec’s report, L’Innovation, Facteur de Puissance, as published by Geopol, C.A.S.E. The findings and analysis presented here are solely the responsibility of the author. The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) is an independent policy research institute established to promote innovative thinking about defense planning and investment strategies for the 21st century. CSBA research makes clear the inextricable link between defense strategies and budgets in fostering a more effective and efficient defense, and the need to transform the U.S. military in light of the emerging military revolution. The center is directed by Dr. Andrew F. Krepinevich. For more information on CSBA, see our web site at http:// www. csbahome.com 1730 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W. Suite 912 Washington, DC 200036 (202) 331-7990 Introduction According to historian and military analyst Martin van Creveld, military technology and infrastructure, logistics and communications “dictate for the most part the major characteristics of organization, training, strategy, even the concept itself of battle. Without it, one couldn’t conduct an armed conflict, and even the existence of conflict would be inconceivable.”1 The vast amount of land held in the rear of the battle sets narrow limits on what could take place along the front: battles, campaigns, and even war. The modern era, since the beginning of the industrial revolution has seen the front line expand to the detriment of the rear flanks. The path dependency described by van Creveld has grown: one fights wars based on and limited by technology. The acceleration of technological innovation over the 20th century is such that we could describe this era as an age of innovation. Moreover, the speed of this acceleration is rapidly increasing. The striking progress in electronics, information and telecommunication in the last two decades have contributed to the creation of unprecedented economic upheavals: innovative waves have a multiplier effect. All innovation necessarily disrupts the status quo ante. This axiom holds as true for military affairs as for economic ones. For example, the introduction of the steam engine and electricity transformed not only industry but also the realm of military affairs. These new technologies did not impact all nations in the same fashion or way. The resulting imbalance soon benefits one [nation] at the expense of another: those gaining from the breakthrough will be able to dominate those who do not. Innovation is an element of power. First this paper will analyze the innovative nature of the United States as a society before studying the significant waves of economic, technological and social innovations as experienced by this country. In the second part, the paper looks at the institutional fluidity valued by Americans and how this has played a role in fostering innovation. In this section, the study will also look at U.S. geopolitics. Thirdly, the study will then observe the connections between civilian and military evolution and how each has influenced the other, particularly in regards to the fragmentation of economic activity and organizational changes. The paper will question what is meant by the concept, the “revolution in military affairs,” looking closely at promulgators of the concept and at resistance to its acceptance in the fourth section. The fifth section will sound out the RMA’s impact on doctrines, industry and research and development. The sixth and final part will attempt to put forth some of these notions as they apply to France and Europe. A bibliography of documents relevant to the current U.S. debate is provided in the Appendix. 1 Martin van Creveld, Technology and War, From 2000 BC to the Present, The Free Press, Macmillan, New York (1991), pp. 311-2. 1: The United States: Innovative Society An observer of the United States today would have two principal impressions: its renewed sense of power and its bubbling innovation. These are not discrete, but rather are associated phenomena. The facts seem to clearly show that the United States is better at innovation than other countries. First, this report will attempt to grab hold of the rebound effects of this superior innovation, without forgetting the recent decline that affected power and innovation, the nadir of which is symbolized by Carter’s presidency. First this report discusses the sociology of innovation—which is based on U.S. history and its constitutional nature—and then examines the economic character of the American marketplace, and moves to the idea that there is a socio-cultural fluidity within American society. Second, the study will look at economic innovations, particularly those caused by a wave of technological innovation, the “drought” between the end of the Vietnam War and the end of Jimmy Carter’s term of office, and then the benefits from a new type of economy, based on decentralization and the unfolding economic revolution. In the course of human history, the first experiment demonstrating thermodynamic efficiency was conducted by Benjamin Franklin in 1744. This is one of the first contributions of the American colonies to innovation. Just as Franklin encompassed the scientist, the businessman and the politician, the causes and effects of innovation studied in this paper are parts of a whole. 1.1 Sociology of Innovation 1.1.1 The "Tocqueville" Base As many historians and analysts have noted, the United States, in contrast to the old nations of Europe and, it could be said today, of Asia, possesses neither a territorial nor an ethnic identity. Rather, the United States has become a new ethno-territorial entity, having been created on the basis of a social contract freely entered into by its citizens. This is what American social scientists call the “American Experiment,” in the sense that the nation [United States] is an experiment rather than a country rooted since time immemorial in, according to the ideology of some Europeans, “blood and earth.” Thus, the United States is first defined by being established on a contractual, not natural basis, and is itself the very representation of that contract. The contract is—following the epistomological issues raised by the Declaration of Independence—the Constitution of 1787, itself arising from a long, deliberative process involving not just the Founding Fathers but many other thinkers, intellectuals and political scientists. Completed by the Bill of Rights in 1791, this contract enhances and makes universal the fundamental concept that power originates from the people and so constitutes the state; the state is the representative of the people and the territorial organizations it creates: the federal government and its administration are not fundamental, but secondary; they do not establish, but are established.2 Clearly, unlike the European tradition preceding this era, the populace is not beholden to the state, nor are people subjects of the crown, but rather they are subject to a law in which the governing concept is natural law, not divine right. The abolition of an ideology based on roots and ethnicity corresponds to the abandonment of these as criteria for belonging: no longer is sanguinity or caste membership the basis for social hierarchies, but an individual’s worth: the American social contract is based on the individual. 2 Cf: 10th amendment, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” 2 This notion of a meritocracy, and the absence of identification with a particular region or territory, makes social fluidity normal, not exceptional; the social rigidity that serfdom, guilds, and [medieval] corporations hold as coterminous with the divine order of things, disappears; change becomes the norm. It was not surprising that emigrants settling down in new territory, became inspired by the pioneering spirit, itself arising out of such notions. American history as such fosters the notion of change and pioneering. The apparently endless extension westward, the frontier unfolding before the conquest, the ceaseless contribution of immigration were consolidating unconsciously what was desired by the collective conscience. Despite the melting pot’s recurring crises, the pattern continues. The United States did not escape the desire to consolidate acquired positions and transform them into social monopolies: the blue bloods of Boston and New England wanted to erect an English-style aristocracy. Robber barons believed they could also create another European aristocracy, but all these attempts have remained ephemeral and have been swept aside by the flux of change. The United States remains a nation of pioneers and immigrants who are conscious of these realities. The closing of the frontier, once the Pacific was reached, and the refusal to pursue colonial policies have not tamed the vision, but have redirected it from geography to other spheres such as the New Frontier announced by President Kennedy in 1961. This said, the American social contract is not that of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. The secret meritocracy of elites. The circulation among elites allows for renewal, but it still assumes a society directed by elites. In the American version, there are functional elites, not feudal or post-feudal ones. Nor are the elites tied as such to the state: they do not derive their force or power from their association with the government, but on the contrary, once established as elites, they then bring their status under the guise of providing the service an elite owes the state. These elites are local, primarily wealth-based, whether it was earned in agriculture, business, industry or banking. The power comes from below. This power itself is not the monolith of European absolutism. The separation of powers theorized by Montesquieu, John Locke and David Hume has been realized.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FUTURE WARFARE Anthology
    FUTURE WARFARE Anthology Revised Edition Major General Robert H. Scales, Jr. U.S. Army War College Carlisle barracks, pennsylvania ***** The views expressed within this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. This report is cleared for public release; distribution is unlimited. ***** ISBN 1-58487-026-5 ii CONTENTS Foreword General Donn A. Starry U.S. Army, Retired ............................. v Prologue Major General Robert H. Scales, Jr . .............. ix Revised Acknowledgements ........................ xi Introduction to the First Edition Dr. Williamson Murray ....................... xiii Preface to the First Edition Major General Robert H. Scales, Jr. ............. xix 1. Speed and Power: Primal Forces in the New American Style of War .......................... 1 2. Cycles of War ................................. 9 3. Preparing For War in the 21st Century with Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper, USMC, Retired ............................... 23 4. Adaptive Enemies: Dealing with the Strategic Threat after 2010 ............................. 41 5. A Sword with Two Edges: Maneuver in 21st Century Warfare .............. 65 6. From Korea to Kosovo : How America’s Army Has Learned to Fight Limited Wars in the Precision Age: ......................... 89 7. Clashes of Visions: Sizing and Shaping Our Forces in a Fiscally Constrained Environment .......... 111 8. America’s Army: Preparing For Tomorrow’s Security Challenges ......................... 125 9. The Dawn of a New Age of Warfare: And the Clarion Call for Enhanced Maneuver Capabilities ........................ 145 iii 10. The Annual Report for The Army After Next Project to the Chief of Staff of the Army ......... 153 11. The Army After Next: Intertwining Military Art, Science, and Technology Out to the Year 2025 with Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS ANNUAL REPORT July 1,1996-June 30,1997 Main Office Washington Office The Harold Pratt House 1779 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. 58 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10021 Washington, DC 20036 Tel. (212) 434-9400; Fax (212) 861-1789 Tel. (202) 518-3400; Fax (202) 986-2984 Website www. foreignrela tions. org e-mail publicaffairs@email. cfr. org OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS, 1997-98 Officers Directors Charlayne Hunter-Gault Peter G. Peterson Term Expiring 1998 Frank Savage* Chairman of the Board Peggy Dulany Laura D'Andrea Tyson Maurice R. Greenberg Robert F Erburu Leslie H. Gelb Vice Chairman Karen Elliott House ex officio Leslie H. Gelb Joshua Lederberg President Vincent A. Mai Honorary Officers Michael P Peters Garrick Utley and Directors Emeriti Senior Vice President Term Expiring 1999 Douglas Dillon and Chief Operating Officer Carla A. Hills Caryl R Haskins Alton Frye Robert D. Hormats Grayson Kirk Senior Vice President William J. McDonough Charles McC. Mathias, Jr. Paula J. Dobriansky Theodore C. Sorensen James A. Perkins Vice President, Washington Program George Soros David Rockefeller Gary C. Hufbauer Paul A. Volcker Honorary Chairman Vice President, Director of Studies Robert A. Scalapino Term Expiring 2000 David Kellogg Cyrus R. Vance Jessica R Einhorn Vice President, Communications Glenn E. Watts and Corporate Affairs Louis V Gerstner, Jr. Abraham F. Lowenthal Hanna Holborn Gray Vice President and Maurice R. Greenberg Deputy National Director George J. Mitchell Janice L. Murray Warren B. Rudman Vice President and Treasurer Term Expiring 2001 Karen M. Sughrue Lee Cullum Vice President, Programs Mario L. Baeza and Media Projects Thomas R.
    [Show full text]
  • Good Strategy, Bad Tactics: Limits, Challenges and Opportunities For
    LIMITS, CHALLENGES, AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR MODERN COUNTERINSURGENCY by Natasha Schlenoff A thesis submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Global Security Studies Baltimore, Maryland August 2015 © 2015 Natasha Schlenoff All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT The overall goal of this thesis is to draw some conclusions about the kinds of strategies and tactics that those engaging in irregular warfare should employ. Given the increasing number of intrastate conflicts and future U.S. involvement in counterinsurgency, it is important for policy makers and strategists to be clear-eyed about viable ways to engage in irregular war. Thus, this paper’s analysis of previous counterinsurgency and stability operations, and estimate of the U.S. military’s institutional capacity to adapt to irregular warfare could serve as a useful guide for future force planning. The first and second chapters of this thesis examine divergent strategies in counterinsurgency and stability operations. Chapter One assesses whether indiscriminate force is strategically effective in national counterinsurgency campaigns. The findings of this chapter indicate that while indiscriminate force may be tactically effective in the near-term, indiscriminate force alone does not produce long-term success. Chapter Two assesses conditions for conflict and stability in Iraq, and why, despite similarly low levels of development and proximity to violence, some areas of Iraq are more stable than others. My research found the examined Shi’a and Kurdish communities in Iraq maintained stability as a result of ethnic homogenization and a capable local security force, rather than COIN and international development efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • Neoconservatism's Deadly Influence
    HISTORYHISTORY— PAST AND PERSPECTIVE U.S.S.R. founder and former commander of the Soviet Army AP Images Leon Trotsky, a Bolshevik revolutionary and Marxist intellectual Neoconservatism’s Deadly Influence A look at the roots of neoconservatism and the reasons why this deadly movement must be rejected in favor of the true conservatism as envisioned by our Founders. by John F. McManus respects from the conservatism of the didly presented the movement’s attitude Republican party. We … accepted the in a 1989 article appearing in Kristol’s A neoconservative is a liberal who New Deal in principle, and had little journal, The National Interest. Boldly has been mugged by reality. affection for the kind of isolation- calling for the integration of the United — Irving Kristol ism that then permeated American States, Europe, and Japan, he yearned for a conservatism. “super-sovereign” state that would be “ec- he above definition has joyfully and onomically, culturally, and politically he- repeatedly been cited by many de- There you have it: neoconservatism’s most gemonic in the world.” Not satisfied with T fenders of neoconservatism. They prominent adherent wants it to be linked such a novel creation, he further urged a consider their branch of political thought to Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal “new universalism [which] would require a benign movement even though its clout socialism and, because of its rejection of the conscious depreciation not only of has been recognized as dominant over the “isolationism,” to be further identified as American sovereignty but of the notion Bush administration. Kristol likely hopes a champion of meddling in the affairs of of sovereignty in general.” And he added: that everyone who learns of his quip will other nations.
    [Show full text]
  • Class:-12, Political Science Notes Chapter:- 04 Alternative Centers of Power DATE:- 8/07/21 European Union • After
    Class:-12, Political Science Notes Chapter:- 04 Alternative Centers of Power DATE:- 8/07/21 European Union • After the end of the Second World War, there was a dilemma among many European leaders over the status of Europe. • The Second World War shattered the structure on which the European states had based their relations. • The Cold War aided the integration of Europe after 1945. The European economy was revived by the extensive financial support by USA under the ‘Marshall Plan’. • The Organisation for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) was established in 1948 to channel aid to the West European states. Another step forward in political cooperation was the establishment of the council of Europe in 1949. • The disintegration of USSR led to the formation of European Union in 1992 which laid the foundation for a common foreign and security policy, cooperation on justice and creation of a single currency. • The European Union has evolved over time from an economic union to an increasingly political one. • The European Union has economic, political, diplomatic and military influence. • Economically, the European Union is the world’s biggest economy. It had a GDP of more than $12 trillion in 2005. Its currency Euro, can pose a threat to the dominance of the US dollar. • On the political and diplomatic ground, Britain and France, the two members of EU are permanent members of the UN Security Council. • In the defence field, the European Union’s combined armed forces are the second largest in the world. Association of South East Asian Nations [ASEAN] • Before and during the Second World War, the South East Asia suffered a lot from repeated colonialism i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    OUP UNCORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOF – FIRSTPROOFS, Sat Sep 19 2020, NEWGEN C& Introduction Christopher McKnight Nichols and Andrew Preston C&.P' What is grand strategy? What does it aim to achieve? Does it have relevance— and, if so, applicability—beyond questions of war and peace? And what di!erentiates it from normal strategic thought— what, in other words, makes it “grand”? C&.P( In recent years, historians and other scholars have o!ered useful de"nitions, most of which coalesce around the notion that grand strategy is an ampli"cation of the “normal” strategic practice of deploying various means to attain speci"c ends.1 “#e crux of grand strategy,” writes Paul Kennedy, co- founder of the in$uential Grand Strategy program at Yale University, “lies . in policy, that is, in the capacity of the nation’s leaders to bring together all the elements, both military and nonmilitary, for the preservation and enhancement of the nation’s long-term (that is, in war- time and peacetime) best interests.”2 John Lewis Gaddis, the program’s co- founder with Kennedy, de"nes grand strategy succinctly as “the align- ment of potentially unlimited aspirations with necessarily limited capabil- ities.”3 Hal Brands, an alumnus of Yale’s program and a contributor to this volume, observes that grand strategy is best understood as an “intellectual architecture that lends structure to foreign policy; it is the logic that helps states navigate a complex and dangerous world.”4 Peter Feaver, who followed Yale’s model when establishing a grand strategy program at Duke University, is somewhat more speci"c: “Grand strategy refers to the collection of plans and policies that comprise the state’s deliberate e!ort to harness political, military, diplomatic, and economic tools together to advance that state’s na- tional interest.”5 International Relations theorist Stephen Walt is even more precise: “A state’s grand strategy is its plan for making itself secure.
    [Show full text]
  • Emerging Powers and Emerging Trends in Global Governance
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Stephen, Matthew D. Article — Accepted Manuscript (Postprint) Emerging Powers and Emerging Trends in Global Governance Global Governance Provided in Cooperation with: WZB Berlin Social Science Center Suggested Citation: Stephen, Matthew D. (2017) : Emerging Powers and Emerging Trends in Global Governance, Global Governance, ISSN 1942-6720, Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, Vol. 23, Iss. 3, pp. 483-502, http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02303009 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/215866 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu This article was published by Brill in Global Governance, Vol. 23 (2017), Iss. 3, pp. 483–502 (2017/08/19): https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02303009.
    [Show full text]
  • Does China Pose an Immediate Threat to U.S. Strategic Interests And, If So, Will the Envisioned Asian Pivot Address Such Concerns?
    February 2014 | Issue 11 1 Does China pose an immediate threat to U.S. strategic interests and, if so, will the envisioned Asian pivot address such concerns? Strategika CONFLICTS OF THE PAST AS LESSONS FOR THE PRESENT Issue From 11 the Working Group on the Role of Military History in Contemporary Conflict at the HooverFebruary Institution 2014 Image: Poster Collection, CC 75, Hoover Institution Archives Military History in Contemporary Conflict As the very name of Hoover Institution attests, military history lies at the very core of our dedi- cation to the study of “War, Revolution, and Peace.” Indeed, the precise mission statement of the Hoover Institution includes the following promise: “The overall mission of this Institution is, from its records, to recall the voice of experience against the making of war, and by the study of these records and their publication, to recall man’s endeavors to make and preserve peace, and to sustain for America the safeguards of the American way of life.” From its origins as a library and archive, the Hoover Institution has evolved into one of the foremost research centers in the world for policy formation and pragmatic analysis. It is with this tradition in mind, that the “Working Group on the Role of Military History in Contemporary Conflict” has set its agenda— reaffirming the Hoover Institution’s dedication to historical research in light of contemporary challenges, and in particular, reinvigorating the national study of military history as an asset to foster and enhance our national security. By bringing together a diverse group of distinguished military historians, security analysts, and military veterans and practitioners, the working group seeks to examine the conflicts of the past as critical lessons for the present.
    [Show full text]
  • Remembering George Kennan Does Not Mean Idolizing Him
    UNITED STATES InsTITUTE OF PEACE www.usip.org SPECIAL REPORT 1200 17th Street NW • Washington, DC 20036 • 202.457.1700 • fax 202.429.6063 ABOUT THE REPORT Melvyn P. Leffler This report originated while Melvyn P. Leffler was a Jennings Randolph Fellow at the United States Institute of Peace. He was writing his book on what appeared to be the most intractable and ominous conflict of the post–World War II era—the Cold War. He was addressing the questions of why the Cold War lasted as long as it did and why it ended when Remembering it did. As part of the ongoing dialogue at the United States Institute of Peace, he was repeatedly asked about the lessons of the Cold War for our contemporary problems. George Kennan His attention was drawn to the career of George F. Kennan, the father of containment. Kennan was a rather obscure and frustrated foreign service officer at the U.S. embassy in Lessons for Today? Moscow when his “Long Telegram” of February 1946 gained the attention of policymakers in Washington and transformed his career. Leffler reviews Kennan’s legacy and ponders the implications of his thinking for the contemporary era. Is it Summary possible, Leffler wonders, to reconcile Kennan’s legacy with the newfound emphasis on a “democratic peace”? • Kennan’s thinking and policy prescriptions evolved quickly from the time he wrote the Melvyn P. Leffler, a former senior fellow at the United States “Long Telegram” in February 1946 until the time he delivered the Walgreen Lectures Institute of Peace, won the Bancroft Prize for his book at the University of Chicago in 1950.
    [Show full text]
  • Insights from the Second Lebanon War
    CHILDREN AND FAMILIES The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that EDUCATION AND THE ARTS helps improve policy and decisionmaking through ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT research and analysis. HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE This electronic document was made available from INFRASTRUCTURE AND www.rand.org as a public service of the RAND TRANSPORTATION Corporation. INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS LAW AND BUSINESS NATIONAL SECURITY Skip all front matter: Jump to Page 16 POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Support RAND Browse Reports & Bookstore TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore the RAND National Defense Research Institute View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND electronic documents to a non-RAND website is prohibited. RAND electronic documents are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. All Glory Is Fleeting Insights from the Second Lebanon War Russell W. Glenn Prepared for the United States Joint Forces Command Approved for public release; distribution unlimited NATIONAL DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE The research described in this report was sponsored by the United States Joint Forces Command Joint Urban Operations Office.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Governance 2025: at a Critical Juncture
    Global Governance 2025: at a Critical Juncture NIC 2010-08 September 2010 This page was intentionally left blank. This page was intentionally left blank. Global Governance 2025: At a Critical Juncture Inquiries regarding this report may be made to Mathew Burrows, Counselor to the National Intelligence Council, on (703) 482-0741 and to the EU Institute of Security Studies on 0033-1-56-89-19-51. NIC 2010-08 September 2010 This page was intentionally left blank. Preface The United States’ National Intelligence Council (NIC) and the European Union’s Institute for Security Studies (EUISS) have joined forces to produce this assessment of the long-term prospects for global governance frameworks. This exercise builds on the experience of the two institutions in identifying the key trends shaping the future international system. Since the mid 1990s, the NIC has produced four editions of its landmark Global Trends report. The most recent one, Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World, published in late 2008, noted that momentous change was ahead, with the gap between increasing disorder and weakening governance structures widening. The EUISS produced the first EU-level report on the factors affecting the evolution of the international system in 2006, The New Global Puzzle. What World for the EU in 2025? The report stressed that a multipolar system is emerging and that matching the new distribution of power with new rules and institutions will be critical to preserving international peace and stability. The US and the EU do not always see eye to eye on every issue on the international agenda, but they share fundamental values and strategic interests to an extent not matched by any other partners in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia's Turn to Eurasia
    CSS Policy Perspectives ETH Zurich Vol. 6/5, August 2018 Russia’s Turn to Eurasia Russian efforts to integrate some post-Soviet states into the common framework of the Eurasian Economic Union could have a lasting impact—Europe should take note. By Jeronim Perović oscow’s failure to make Ukraine part of its Eurasian economic, political and military weight in order to influ- Meconomic integration project was a severe blow to ence developments in its neighborhood. It was only from Russian foreign policy ambitions. Notwithstanding the early 2000s onwards that Russia’s position in the re- Ukraine’s turn to the West, however, Russia has continued gion was destabilizing, as Western states and organizations its integration efforts in the post-Soviet space, resulting in began to make inroads. The Baltic states became NATO the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Union members in 2004, the first oil and gas pipelines circum- (EAEU) in 2015. The EAEU’s overall economic perfor- venting Russian territory were built with the help of for- mance has been modest so far, and the organization, con- eign companies, and China started to expand economically sisting of Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Armenia, and Kyr- into Central Asia. gyzstan, has a long way to go before it achieves its goal of Moscow’s decision to push for regional economic forming an EU-style internal market with free movement integration was a reaction to these processes. So far, Mos- of goods, services, people and capital. But there have been cow’s primary interest has not been in the economic side of tangible achievements in various sectors, and ambitions for integration (after all, trade with EAEU members accounts the future are high.
    [Show full text]